From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: marc.zyngier@arm.com (Marc Zyngier)
Date: Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:07:24 +0000
Subject: [GIT PULL 4/4] mach-virt platform code for 3.9
In-Reply-To: <1359986131-13034-4-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com>
References: <1359986131-13034-1-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com>
 <1359986131-13034-4-git-send-email-will.deacon@arm.com>
Message-ID: <510FF8DC.6080202@arm.com>
To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org

On 04/02/13 13:55, Will Deacon wrote:
> NOTE: I'm not suggesting you pull this one as it stands -- see below!
> 
> This is the last batch from me (Marc is dealing with vgic and virtual
> timers) and introduces support for mach-virt. This depends on:
> 
>         - for-arm-soc/arch-timers (third pull request in this series)
>         - for-rmk/virt/psci (already pulled)
>         - irqchip/gic-vic-move (an arm-soc branch)
> 
> As a result, the diffstat is atrocious so it would be better if you
> could create a branch merging the above dependendies, which I could
> rebase onto (there's actually only two patches here).

The remaining of the KVM/ARM code (vgic and timer) has exactly the same
problem, plus an additional dependency on the actual kvm/core branch
that Russell just pulled.

I can either send you two pull requests that will basically look like
this one (actually, a lot worse), or you could create a stable branch
containing:

	- for-rmk/virt/kvm/core (first pull request in the series)
	- for-arm-soc/arch-timers (third pull request in the series)
	- irqchip/gic-vic-move (already in arm-soc)

You could either create two stable branches (one for mach-virt and one
for kvm-arm/{vgic,timer}), or a single one containing all the prerequisites.

What do you think?

Thanks,

	M.
-- 
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...